“To the People . . .
With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.
This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.
Similar sentiments have hitherto prevailed among all orders and denominations of men among us. To all general purposes we have uniformly been one people each individual citizen everywhere enjoying the same national rights, privileges, and protection. As a nation we have made peace and war; as a nation we have vanquished our common enemies; as a nation we have formed alliances, and made treaties, and entered into various compacts and conventions with foreign states.
. . .
This convention composed of men who possessed the confidence of the people, and many of whom had become highly distinguished by their patriotism, virtue and wisdom, in times which tried the minds and hearts of men, undertook the arduous task. In the mild season of peace, with minds unoccupied by other subjects, they passed many months in cool, uninterrupted, and daily consultation; and finally, without having been awed by power, or influenced by any passions except love for their country, they presented and recommended to the people the plan produced by their joint and very unanimous councils.”

In the second essay of what would become known as the Federalist papers, John Jay, future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, openly acknowledges the advantage America holds for creating a truly great union.

SAMENESS

same ancestors

same religion

same language

same principles of government

same manners and customs

JOINT

counsel

arms

efforts

fighting side by side

through a long and bloody war

What did our founder’s environment of sameness create?

A band of brethren that united with the strongest of ties that “should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.” If Americans were to be factionalized, Jay fortuitously explained by ending with:

I sincerely wish that it may be as clearly foreseen by every good citizen, that whenever the dissolution of the Union arrives, America will have reason to exclaim, in the words of the poet: “FAREWELL! A LONG FAREWELL TO ALL MY GREATNESS.”

My career and studies have reinforced the belief that America, our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, and American’s moral belief in “the Golden Rule” and the “rule of law”, created the most fruitful environment. I realized after decades of experience, not every American loves and respects America’s dream of liberty, our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, Rights, or Equal protection under the law. There are people born and raised in America who despise these values. They are not stupid or ignorant. They actually hate America’s form and function. They hate liberty and freedom of choice for others.

For example, Alger Hiss. Born and raised in America, attended University and Law School becoming a Supreme Court clerk. Afterwards Hiss becomes a government attorney in Roosevelt’s administration and eventually attends the Malta conference in 1945 as part of America’s delegation. All the while:

How can an American, enjoying success, privilege, and rise to America’s pinnacles; hate that system so much he actively works to undermine and overthrow that system in favor of a totalitarian regime? Alger Hiss awakened me to the reality many despise liberty and freedom. Hiss destroyed my naiveté that all would naturally love and revere justice and liberty, especially when they understood the importance and rarity.

Some will never revere American principles, even if/when they understand and know their meaning. They despise liberty and work to undo our “civil society” and replace it with their own vision of authoritarianism. This reality describes the actions of current politicians, lobbyists, bureaucrats and judges creating and advocating policies that weaken and destroy American values and foundations. Accepting reality, still, I will never understand those who seek “rule by the mob” and “might makes right. The opposites of justice and equality. Many lawyers, politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, now purposely operate selfishly to divide, factionalize and weaken the foundations of America.

Today’s Democrats hate American principles. Today’s Progressive Republicans hate American principles. Principles espoused by John Jay over 200 years ago.

So how to remake America? Simple:

Destroy the bonds of sameness and “split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.”

Import peoples with the culture you know will create discord and division. Import people who will remain apart and to themselves. Import people who will hold fast to their tribal cultures. Import people who will actively ensure their progeny will not learn of, appreciate, and assimilate into America’s belief system of equality and individuality. Import peoples who will purposely factionalize and separate themselves from the surrounding neighbors, not befriend and support their neighbors. Import a People who will actively work to destroy our very system of government and culture.

This document was discovered in the 2004 FBI raid in Annandale, Virginia among the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood and entered into evidence at the US v HLF trial. It was written in 1991 by Mohamad Akram, listed number two on the list of leaders of the U.S. Palestine Section (Hamas) and was approved by the governing bodies of the Muslim Brotherhood. It was entered into evidence at the US v HLF trial and was stipulated to by the defense as being what it purports to be. Therefore, legally speaking, it is the strategic plan for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. It calls for Civilization Jihad against us in order to overthrow our government and impose an Islamic State under Sharia. This document lists 29 key MB organizations in America which today constitute the most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. today. Furthermore, this document identifies MB Islamic Centers as the “axis” for the MB Movement here from which they will launch their jihad.

Can Americans study another country to see if actions and results corroborate such a plan? Examine England as explained by the essay Unmaking England published January 11, 2016:

In significant respects, the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis form a metaphorical foreign encampment, rather than an immigrant neighborhood, within a country in which a significant minority of them feels in fundamental ways incompatible. A Home Office report on the standoffish Pakistani and Bangladeshi districts in the northern mill towns found that “Separate educational arrangements, community and voluntary bodies, employment, places of worship, language, social and cultural networks, means that many communities operate on the basis of a series of parallel lives.” Less abstractly, Andrew Norfolk, the self-described liberal London Times investigative reporter who methodically uncovered the Rotherham sexual grooming scandal, concludes that “It is possible for a Muslim child to grow up—in the family home, at school and in the mosque and madrassa—without coming into any contact with Western lifestyles, opinions or values.”

The result, as Trevor Phillips asserted in a speech focusing on Pakistani and Bangladeshi neighborhoods, is that “Residentially, some districts are on their way to becoming fully fledged ghettos—black holes into which no-one goes without fear and trepidation, and from which no-one ever escapes undamaged.” Two-thirds of British Muslims only mix socially with other Muslims; that portion is undoubtedly higher among Pakistanis and Bangladeshis specifically. Reinforcing this parallel life is the common practice of returning “home” for a few months every two or three years and an immersion in foreign electronic media. Integration into a wider national life is further hindered—and the retention of a deeply foreign culture is further encouraged—by the fact that most Pakistani marriages, even if one spouse is born in Britain, essentially produce first-generation-immigrant children: the one study that measured this phenomenon, conducted in the north England city of Bradford, found that 85 percent of third- and fourth-generation British Pakistani babies had a parent who was born in Pakistan.(Incidentally, that study also found that 63 percent of Pakistani mothers in Bradford had married their cousins, and 37 percent had married first cousins.)

…

Muslims, the refrain goes, don’t speak with a single voice. The particular makeup of Britain’s overall Muslim population, though, renders that population’s aggregate voice particularly harsh. Since 2001, news organizations, opinion-research firms, and groups such as the Pew Research Center have conducted surveys of the undifferentiated group “British Muslims.” Although any one survey can be misleading or poorly conducted, the findings of various such surveys over a lengthy span of years have regularly disquieted the British public and government because those surveys have consistently shown that a significant minority of British Muslims hold views that could be generously characterized as unsympathetic to the ethos of their adopted nation. Those surveys have found that 24 percent of British Muslims believe British security services played a role in the 7/7 attacks; that 23 percent believe the four men identified as the 7/7 bombers did not actually carry out the attacks; that 45 percent believe the 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy of the U.S. and Israeli governments; that 56 percent believe those identified by the U.S. as the 9/11 assailants were in fact not involved in the attacks; that 37 percent believe British Jews are “a legitimate target as part of the ongoing struggle for justice in the Middle East”; that 46 percent believe British Jews “are in league with the Freemasons to control the media and politics”; that 68 percent want the prosecution of British citizens who “insult” Islam; that 28 percent hope Britain will become a fundamentalist Islamic state; that significant majorities believe that the populations of Western countries—including the British—are selfish, arrogant, greedy, and immoral. These views, the Pew Global Attitudes Project found, were “a notable exception” to those held by Muslims elsewhere in Europe. And as the Muslim population becomes more established in Britain, these attitudes, the evidence strongly suggests, are becoming more intemperate, not less: the few surveys that have measured the attitudes specifically of young British Muslims consistently show that their views are more extreme than those of British Muslims as a whole.

America was founded in liberty by a homogenous population. A nation of immigrants with the same ancestors, language, religion, governing principles, manners and customs. Not different and opposing beliefs. There are many who work to settle peoples in America who hold values and believe in principles the antithesis of American principles. Peoples who have no intent or history of assimilation. This settlement process is a knowing and purposeful plan to “Unmake America” by ensuring “splits into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.” Today’s political promises, history, and evidence reinforces John Jay’s prescient statement:

“I sincerely wish that it may be as clearly foreseen by every good citizen, that whenever the dissolution of the Union arrives, America will have reason to exclaim, in the words of the poet: “FAREWELL! A LONG FAREWELL TO ALL MY GREATNESS.”

There is one more document, called simply “The Project,” that should be examined in the study of the Brotherhood’s expansion into Western society in general, and the U.S. government in particular. A November 2001 raid by Swiss authorities on a villa belonging to Yousef Nada, the Muslim Brotherhood director of the Al-Taqwa bank (which had been funding al-Qa’eda), recovered this 14-page plan, written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982. “The Project” presents a “flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the ‘cultural invasion’ of the West,” according to Patrick Poole, a counterterrorism and Muslim Brotherhood expert. [33] Rather than relying primarily on terrorism, as al-Qa’eda and other kinetic-approach jihadis do, the Muslim Brotherhood opted instead for a progressive infiltration of the very structures of Western society in order to achieve the same end result that al-Qa’eda seeks: Islamic domination over the West.

In view of the alarming success this approach has achieved to date, not only across the Middle East and North Africa, but inside Europe and the U.S., it is worthwhile to quote from Poole’s articles just some of the tactics outlined in “The Project:” [emphasis added]

Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of “moderation”;
Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood’s collective goals;
Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn’t conflict with shari’a law;
Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of “international plots fomented against them”;
Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind”;
Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world[34]